Appellant / Complainant
Belgravia Projects Private Limited
Respondent
Sunil Kumar Pandey
belgravia projects private limited
₹27,21,177
Appellant
Legal Issues & Claims Raised
Case Procedural History & Progression Tree
Visual step-by-step tree detailing dispute origin, interim hearings, and final tribunal ruling.
Complaint Filing & Dispute Registration
Complaint registered under Case ID 0901126037002023 by Belgravia Projects Private Limited against Sunil Kumar Pandey before up_rera.
Hearing
The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Regulatory Authority's order because it directed the handover of possession without first adjudicating the legality of the unit's cancellation. The complaint is restored to the Regulatory Authority for a fresh decision on the validity of the cancellation order.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the appellant 10 days to file a rejoinder and scheduled the appeal for hearing on March 6, 2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal adjourned the appeal to 12.02.2025 and directed the respondent to file objections in the interim.
Hearing
The Tribunal has adjourned the appeal to 17.01.2025 following a joint request from the counsel for both the appellant and the respondent.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal allowed the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, subject to a cost of Rs. 5,000 payable by the appellant to the respondent, and directed the Registry to convert the defective appeal into a regular appeal.
Delay condonation
Upon a joint request from the counsel for both parties, the Tribunal has adjourned the appeal and scheduled it for further hearing on 20.11.2024.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal granted the appellant one week to file a proper affidavit and directed the respondent to file objections within one week thereafter, with the matter listed for hearing on 16.10.2024.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal granted the respondent seven days to file an objection to the appellant's better affidavit and scheduled the next hearing for 20.09.2024.
For Order
The Tribunal granted the appellant seven days to file a better affidavit regarding the grounds for condonation of delay, with subsequent directions for the respondent to file objections and the appellant to file a reply.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal directed the respondent to file objections to the appeal grounds within 10 days and set a hearing date for the application for condonation of delay on 23.07.2024.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal directed the Registry to verify a deposit of Rs. 2,94,837/- made for Section 43(5) compliance and ordered the issuance of notice to the respondent regarding the application for condonation of delay and grounds of appeal.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal rejected the appellant's attempt to deposit funds after deducting earnest money, ruling that full compliance with Section 43(5) of the Act requires depositing the cost of the unit (or at least the amount deposited by the allottee) rather than a reduced amount.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal found the appellant's deposit non-compliant with Section 43(5) of the Act because it calculated a refund instead of following possession directives; consequently, the appellant was directed to rectify this deficiency within one week.
Tribunal Order #0901126037002023-06-03-2025
The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Regulatory Authority's order because it directed the handover of possession without first adjudicating the legality of the unit's cancellation. The complaint is restored to the Regulatory Authority for a fresh decision on the validity of the cancellation order.
Tribunal Order #0901126037002023-20-11-2024
The Tribunal allowed the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, subject to a cost of Rs. 5,000 payable by the appellant to the respondent, and directed the Registry to convert the defective appeal into a regular appeal.
Tribunal Order #0901126037002023-28-02-2024
The Tribunal rejected the appellant's attempt to deposit funds after deducting earnest money, ruling that full compliance with Section 43(5) of the Act requires depositing the cost of the unit (or at least the amount deposited by the allottee) rather than a reduced amount.
Tribunal Order #0901126037002023-02-04-2024
The Tribunal directed the Registry to verify a deposit of Rs. 2,94,837/- made for Section 43(5) compliance and ordered the issuance of notice to the respondent regarding the application for condonation of delay and grounds of appeal.
Tribunal Order #0901126037002023-19-02-2024
The Tribunal found the appellant's deposit non-compliant with Section 43(5) of the Act because it calculated a refund instead of following possession directives; consequently, the appellant was directed to rectify this deficiency within one week.
Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling
The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Regulatory Authority's order because it directed the handover of possession without first adjudicating the legality of the unit's cancellation. The complaint is restored to the Regulatory Authority for a fresh decision on the validity of the cancellation order. Awarded in favor of Appellant.
Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary
Official Ruling Summary
The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Regulatory Authority's order because it directed the handover of possession without first adjudicating the legality of the unit's cancellation. The complaint is restored to the Regulatory Authority for a fresh decision on the validity of the cancellation order.
Ruling Awarded To
Appellant
Statutory Sections Cited (RERA Act 2016)
Appearing Legal Counsel & Advocates
Appellant Advocate(s)
- Applicant/Appellant In-Person
Respondent Advocate(s)
- Rishindra Vikram Singh
Official RERA Tribunal Orders (5)
The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Regulatory Authority's order because it directed the handover of possession without first adjudicating the legality of the unit's cancellation. The complaint is restored to the Regulatory Authority for a fresh decision on the validity of the cancellation order.
The Tribunal allowed the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, subject to a cost of Rs. 5,000 payable by the appellant to the respondent, and directed the Registry to convert the defective appeal into a regular appeal.
The Tribunal rejected the appellant's attempt to deposit funds after deducting earnest money, ruling that full compliance with Section 43(5) of the Act requires depositing the cost of the unit (or at least the amount deposited by the allottee) rather than a reduced amount.
The Tribunal directed the Registry to verify a deposit of Rs. 2,94,837/- made for Section 43(5) compliance and ordered the issuance of notice to the respondent regarding the application for condonation of delay and grounds of appeal.
The Tribunal found the appellant's deposit non-compliant with Section 43(5) of the Act because it calculated a refund instead of following possession directives; consequently, the appellant was directed to rectify this deficiency within one week.
Need to research all rulings for belgravia projects private limited?
Extract builder dossiers, check execution status, and draft RERA appeal petitions in minutes using TathyaGrid.